âMost of [our] investing capitalâ can also mean weâre planning on holding a 60/40 portfolio (not bercing myself with illusions, though, most of us probably plan to go 100% stocks).
Iâm probably not representative on this one since I will have very small amounts Iâll be able to have invested so Iâm pretty neutral to either a crash or a to the moon scenario. Sentiment surveys are all about aggregates, though, so the individual reasons behind individual points shouldnât really matter if we can get enough of them.
Of course, I read it as ânew contributionsâ, too.
I think having little available capital for investment becomes less and less important over time as a bigger pot becomes less and less sensitive to new contributions. If you have 5k (my first contribution in Jan 2022) and add 1k you just added 20% inorganically, if you have 500k and contribute 20k itâs just a blip. I am nowhere near there myself, yet, but one day will be.
I think when I ran the numbers one needs 10 years of steady contributions to be able to leave it alone and even stop adding.
I wasnât sure whether to read that as ânew investing capitalâ or just existing portfolio allocation.
I think even the wording âmostâ hides a lot since I have a large allocation to real estate, bonds and commodities, but stocks is still the biggest. When you look at the stocks, there are also commodity stocks and real estate stocks - arguably, some of these could be re-categorized.
I read the original (cited) survey as where to allocate new money in 2025 but I can see that the question is not phrased clearly cut about this.
Iâd rather not change the survey question mid race â weâre not in politics here, are we? â but if folks thinks it needs clarification, let me know?
Trendline wise, the two nuances probably converge, I would guess?
(Itâs just a sentiment survey â my sentiment changes daily hourly.)
The New York Times picked up on our topic and phrased it as follows in their corresponding headline today:
Active Investors Moving To Bonds In 2025
Famous activist investor @PhilMongoose expressed views today of bonds being more favorable than stocks in 2025. This sent unexpected jittery waves through the trillion dollar AUM hedge fund world. Repercussions even reached Jerome Powell, and the Fed is now re-evaluating the next dot plots, and is considering stepping off the gas even more slowly.
The results of the âtop performing indexâ question are kind of funny, if you think about it. VT is at about 25% of the vote, but whatâs the circumstance where VT outperforms both S&P 500 and VT-ex-US?
If the US as a whole outperforms the world, then S&P 500 will obviously beat VT. If US as a whole underperforms the world, then VT-ex-US will obviously beat VT. I think what youâd need is for US to match the rest of the world overall, but US small cap to trounce US large cap / ex-US. (A small outperformance wouldnât do it, since the weight of US small cap in VT is quite low.)
Itâs not impossible, but I feel that 25% of the forum wouldnât be saying that Russell 2000 will be the best performing index in 2024.
Durch das Lesen und die Teilnahme an diesem Forum bestÀtigst du, dass du den auf http://www.mustachianpost.com/de/ dargestellten Haftungsausschluss gelesen hast und damit einverstanden bist.
